I think SAFETY would prohibit spectators this close to the landing area.
.........bc ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.widomaker.com/~conk
Williamsburg, VA 23185
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Bill Johns wrote:
> At 05:37 PM 3/19/2002 +0000, Joedy Drulia wrote:
> >>IMHO, a landing should be a glide and a slide, not a dash and a >crash. :)
> >
> >>How do you feel about skegs and sharks teeth?
> >
> >Good question. It seems to be a catch 22 type of scenario. One side
> >advocates that these devices increase landing zone safety. The other says
> >that they allow the pilot to cheat.
>
> --snip--
>
> >In a contest, I'm more inclined to agree to ban skids and skegs since a
> >large portion of the skills involved in landing revolve around the concept
> >of energy retention and kinetic management. I think that this concept goes
> >hand in hand with the whole philosphy of sailplane soaring. You only get
> >one chance: one launch and one landing. Devices that take away from the
> >concept seems to cheat the pilot out of this necessary skill.
> >
> >I suppose when it all comes down to it, I would favor a scenario that does
> >not have skids or skegs allowed and perhaps some sort of safety net behind
> >the landing zone to stop overflights and prevent injuries to people.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong in my thinking, but....
>
> Problem/concern: It seems to me that the major argument for skegs is it
> prevents injuries to spectators and participants. The types of injuries
> that are prevented is when the pilot come in so hot that a sliding plane
> would go right through the landing zone catching folks in the ankles and
> shins. Coming in hot is desired as the pilot does not have to deal with
> energy management as carefully, coming in low at a relatively high speed
> and allowing a skeg to stop eliminates the potential problem of
> undershooting the landing zone. Perish the thought of undershooting the
> landing zone and losing points.
>
> Solution: As long as we realize that competing involves landing for which
> landing points are important, why not actually making a proper landing (no
> overshoot/no undershoot) a part of the scheme of things. How about simply
> having a line of concrete building blocks some reasonable distance behind
> the landing zone. Spectators/timers could simply stand behind these during
> iffy landings. Pilots can stand where they choose. Pilots may desire to
> throw themselves in front of their megabuck$ moldy rather than risk the
> sudden stop a concrete block offers when they overshoot the landing
> zone. It's a Darwinian thing. I can't see this happening too many times
> to the same person.
>
> For wimps, perhaps softer barriers such as a few bales of hay or partially
> inflated inner tubes cleverly anchored would work as well. We can design
> fantastic planes with exotic fibers and digital servos and such. I gotta
> believe we can come up with some sort of arresting device that is
> inexpensive, reasonably portable and effective at stopping planes without
> damaging them.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Bill
>
> --
> It comes in pints! Peregrin Took
>
> Bill Johns
> Pullman, WA
>
> RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
>"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
